A MUSIC company has lost a High Court fight with a rival over the rights to 13 Bob Marley songs.
Cayman Music and Blue Mountain Music had aired their dispute at a trial in London in May - and a judge yesterday delivered a ruling.
One song involved was No Woman, No Cry, one of the late Jamaican reggae star's most famous works.
The case centred on the "construction" of an agreement made in 1992 - 11 years after Marley's death - under which copyrights in "various musical works" were transferred by Cayman.
Cayman claimed that the 13 songs were not transferred under that agreement.
Blue Mountain, which is responsible for administering rights transferred under that agreement, disputed the claim.
Deputy High Court judge Richard Meade ruled against Cayman and dismissed the company's claim.
Lawyers for Cayman told the judge that Marley agreed a publishing deal with Cayman in late 1973.
They said the 13 songs were written by Marley between October 1973 and October 1976.
And they said Marley "fraudulently" attributed the songs to other people to avoid the provisions of the 1973 publishing agreement.
Lawyers for Blue Mountain said, on the "straightforward application of ordinary principles of contract law", the claim had to be dismissed.
They accepted that Marley "falsely claimed" that the 13 songs had been composed by other people in an attempt to "escape the automatic assignment of their copyright to Cayman".
But they said it was "common ground" that as a matter of law the "ruse was ineffective".
They said the "plain intention" of the 1992 agreement was to "transfer all rights".
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article